Author
Topic: Saint Nikolaj Velimirovic (Read 33404 times)

Many have called me anti-semitic, ignorant, hateful, an espouser of islamic or fascist ideologies, a conspiracy theorist etcThis does not bother me. However when certain posters started claiming that my beliefs are un-Christian then I have to respond very seriously to this. Previously to this I posted an interview with the Greek monk Paisos. Since certain posters questioned the credibility of the source and tried to divert the topic in hand in every possible direction, I have decided this time that the source shall be beyond refutation. The following article is not from an interview, or hearsay, it is from the complete published works of the greatest Serbian Saint since Saint Sava. This is not my opinion, it is the opinion of the SOC. Indeed I will not give any initial commentary to the text until people respond. Unfortunately, a complete English translation of all his works does not exist on the internet. In any case it is clearly not possible to debate them in their entirety. I will simply give some quotes that I think are relevant in refuting the claim that my 'conspiratorial' beliefs are un-Christian. For those that were telling me that Patriarch Pavle would condemn my thoughts, remember that this Saint was canonised by this very Patriarch. This first citation is from 'Reci Srpskom Narodu kroz Tamnicki Prozor' (Words to the Serbian nation through the dungeon window).

"... During the course of ages, they who crucified the Messiah, the Lord Jesus, the Son of God, made Europe into the chief battle ground for the devil and against God. And it is today the chief battle-ground of the Jews and of the devil the father of the Jews... Europe does not know this, and here lies all the desperation of its fate, the entire dark tragedy of its peoples. Above all it does not know whom it belongs to. It knows nothing but that which the Jews have ordered it to believe. It can judge of the value of nothing until the Jews have set up their balance for the measurement of value. Its politicians like sleepwalkers in their delirium talk of the equality (ignorance) of all beliefs and non-beliefs, that is, that which the Jews want and desire, because it is necessary for them to have legal equality with Christians, so that they can then drive out Christianity and have Christianity made non-believers, and place their foot on their necks.

All the modern catch-words of Europe have been composed by the Jews who crucified Christ, including democracy, and strikes, and socialism, and atheism and the toleration of all religions, and pacifism and universal revolution and capitalism and communism.

All these are the invention of Jews, or of the devil, the father of the Jews. But the wonder is that the Europeans, baptized and anointed, should have surrendered so totally to the Jews that they think with Jewish heads, accept Jewish programmes, adopt Jewish anti-Christianity, receive Jewish lies as truth, welcome Jewish catch-words as their own, walk along the Jewish road and serve Jewish aims. This is the thing to wonder at in our time, and nothing else in the world.

Everything else is less important or unimportant. But the most important thing is how Christian Europe managed to become the serving maid of the Jews... Think on these things, brother Serbs..."

ROMANS Chapter 11:I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Know ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. But what saith the answer of God unto him? “I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.”Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded. (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them: Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again. For if thou were cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree? For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.

1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

I am sorry, SP I can not follow you there. I love St. Nikolaj very much, for a lot of reasons. But, not for his view and word about Jews.

As far as Anti-Jewish tendency (and here I am talking about generalization and total antisemitism and not about Anti-Zionism which is -for me- representative of militant Judeism) St. Nikolaj is one of the worse in the history of the Orthodox Church, certainly the worse one I know of in Serbian Orthodox Church.

In accordance with what the Fathers taught, and especially St. Photius (cf Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, 67-72), I must reject any teaching like the one quoted above, whether it be from Joe Layman, my patron saint Justin Popovich, my patron's spiritual Father St. Nikolai, or anyone else. Even the greatest of saints are wrong sometimes. It is our duty to "cover our Father's nakedness" and hide their errors like good sons, not to hold to those errors and trumpet them obstinately.

In accordance with what the Fathers taught, and especially St. Photius (cf Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, 67-72), I must reject any teaching like the one quoted above, whether it be from Joe Layman, my patron saint Justin Popovich, my patron's spiritual Father St. Nikolai, or anyone else. Even the greatest of saints are wrong sometimes. It is our duty to "cover our Father's nakedness" and hide their errors like good sons, not to hold to those errors and trumpet them obstinately.

I am sorry, SP I can not follow you there. I love St. Nikolaj very much, for a lot of reasons. But,ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š not for his view and word about Jews. As far as Anti-Jewish tendency (and here I am talking about generalization and total antisemitism and not about Anti-Zionism which is -for me- representative of militant Judeism)

I understand. I thought that it might give the wrong impression since 'jew' is always used instead of 'zionist'. I am sure when he says jew he is indeed referring to those representative of militant Judaism, but also to atheists. That is why I think he uses the word 'jew'. I accept that this is still a generalization, but he clearly believes in collective responsibility.

St. Nikolaj is one of the worse in the history of the Orthodox Church, certainly the worse one I know of in Serbian Orthodox Church.

Brother if you read his works, he has just as harsh words for the Serbian people. People don't seem to have a problem with that though.

Since I can find barely any of his works on the internet, I'll translate what I can out of that which I think is relevant to the discussion. Anyone who questions my translation can check with a Serb who has the book (the same one as before).Nations must take a collective responsibility. We live in a society which is interwoven, if the whole society becomes corrupt, then the whole society must take the blame. The following extract shows that to nobody does this apply to more than the Serbian people, it is not just the Jews who are criticised by Saint Nikolaj Velimirovic.

The greatest sons of a nation serve as an example to the nation. But they are not just examples, they are also the protectors of the nation. But they are not just protectors, they are also the accusers of the nation. Who was Saint Sava? He was the most beatiful example to the Serbian people, the fiery defender of the Serbian people, but also the accuser of the Serbian people before God.Who would have thought this? In fact this is perfectly natural, that the person that gave rise to our spiritual renewal, has the right to accuse us. When the Jews were already plotting against Christ, the Saviour said: 'Don't think that I will denounce you to God; there is another that will accuse you, Moses, who you look up to.' /John 5, 45/ In this way witness was borne on evil doers by those that had seen the heavenly world, just like the earthly one. ......... You ask for what would Saint Sava accuse you before God? Truly there are two or three things for which he could accuse us.First, he could accuse us of being weak and for kneeling down to European idolatry. (Reference to the acceptance among Serbs of western secular civilization instead of our Orthodox faith.)...Second, he could accuse us because our leaders gave more respect to Muhammed and the Pope than to him. (Reference to a time inbetween the world wars, I think Islam and Catholicism were given greater rights in Yugoslav schools.)You ask for what would Saint Sava accuse you before God? Truly there are five or ten things for which he could accuse us. Firstly for schools without faith; secondly for politics without respect; thirdly for an army without a unity of spirit; fourthly for marriages without faithfullness, and so on.Are you still asking why our Saint Sava could accuse us before God? Truly, because of ten or twenty things he could accuse us. Because of unmarried and self-obssessed middle aged people; because of weak minded youth; because of souless selfish people, because of greedy bachelors without children; because of impurity of the soul; because of dirty tongues; because of blasphemy; because of disrespect to parents; because of laughing at teachers; because of competition in outwitting rather than helping brothers; and because of the statues we did and didn't put up infront of our parliament; and because we did not put a cross on the memorial to the unknown hero on Avala.And for many more of our sins and crazy deeds Saint Sava can accuse us before God.

In accordance with what the Fathers taught, and especially St. Photius (cf Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit, 67-72), I must reject any teaching like the one quoted above, whether it be from Joe Layman, my patron saint Justin Popovich, my patron's spiritual Father St. Nikolai, or anyone else. Even the greatest of saints are wrong sometimes. It is our duty to "cover our Father's nakedness" and hide their errors like good sons, not to hold to those errors and trumpet them obstinately.

I think it is the height of arrogance to believe that we know best and can cover whatever part of 'our Father's nakedness' doesn't suit us. Who are we to decide that they are in error. I do agree with you that they are not infallible though.

Here is another extract. In his vision and hopes for the Serbian nation, nowhere does he hope for violence or hate. Just as he chastises the Serbian nation for their sins, he points out the sins of others who must also be accountable, such as the Jews. It is only in this day and age when people think individualistically that people think it is wrong for nations to take responsibility togther. They like to think of themselves as independant to the rest of society. This is what has brought the problems we have in society today. The Jews are not innocent victims and bystanders in history, just as many other nations have sinned, including the Serbian one. Yet it is only taboo to criticise Jews? Anyway here is my translation of another extract:

There is an end and limit to everything, other than Gods mercy. This was revealed in the history of the obstinate nation of Israel. The depths of the sea can be measured but the pain God feels for his creation cannot be measuredÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚Â¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¦.God waits and waits. But what does he wait for? Not for one man that will show the path to all the nations and who will give them laws that will lead to salvation. God does not wait for this. This has already been. The Messiah has appeared and shown the path and law of God. The nations cannot expect another Messiah. Therefore God is not waiting for another Messiah, or a genius statesman, or military leader or wise man. This has all been, and it is all unnecessary for the future of mankind, for the happiness of the human race.God, at this time, is waiting for one nation. Not one man, but one whole nation who would with their whole heart give themselves up to God and serve him alone. God is not waiting for a man as tall as the Himalayas, to lead and save humanity. Only idiots and non-Christians expect this. God awaits one nation who would kneel before him like an ant in front of a human, so that that nation would serve as an example to all other nations in the service of love; the light of truth and as an example of purity.In our time everything is in inter-related, we are joined in societies. Nations look to other nationsÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚Â¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¦.Does the Serbian nation want to satisfy God? The holy prophet Isiah wrote of his vision of God on a high throne, and he heard a voice: ‘who will I send? Who will answer the call?’ Isiah answered: ‘Here I am, send me’. /Is. 6, 8/.Today God needs not one man, but one nation. And he again puts forward the same question: Who shall I send? Who will answer the call?Oh Serbian nation, do you have the courage to answer as the great Isiah did: Here I am, send me Lord?You are up to this, only you among all nations, only if you decide. Your cross-shaped banners urge you to this. Your cross-bearing general urge you to this. Your Golgotha past urges you to this. All the depths of your suffering and all the heights of your visions urge you to this mission. All your Saints and heroes, unusual and unique to all others, are blessing you on this path. Your battlefields and your millions of casualties in youth and children give you the inspiration for this task. Do you have the courage, most courageous of nations, to answer the call and say: Here I am God, send me?God bless you if you are courageous enough to say this and to accept it. This would be in the spirit of your whole past which is in the path of Christ and freedom. And it is necessary to the nations of this earth like bread, water and air. This is a hard task, you will say? Well is there any other nation which is more than you schooled and tested in suffering?This mission is for a big nation you will say. Do not speak like this. It is the big nations who have ruined everything, who have fallen from Christ and who have desecrated all other nations on earth. They cannot in their weakness serve as an example for anybody. We need an example of health and the true life, and the light of eternal truth. There is a dark foreboding for the masses who are without health, without the true life, without the light, without the truth, without a vision, without aspiration to heaven and without love. But in everything else they are richÃƒÆ’Ã‚Â¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚Â¬Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¦.But we are also infected with the same illness; How will we therefore provide an example of health and spiritual fullness? It is easy to answer this: Truly, we Serbs are also infected; but to us, that which to them is illness of the lungs, heart and mind, is to us only skin-deep. Return to your spiritual spas and you will be healed. The first of these, and the most holy is Hilandar, second Studenica, then Zica, then Sopocani and Gracanica and so on. Oh simple Christian nation, agricultural and hard working, your spiritual spas still live, and you are hard pressed to find anything better. And your national church still lives. Wash yourself three times and you will be healthy: First in your heroic historic martyrdom of your grandfathers and great grandfathers; Second in the simple but brave and God-fearing people, and third in your miraculous national Church. And you will be totally healthy. Then you will be able with fear and trembling to kneel before almighty God and with inner peace say: Here I am Lord, send me! Let the Holy mother of God and your patron Saint support you in wisdom, strength and unity. Amen.

I don't see that that any "interpretation" was offered from the quoted Pauline text [and other Biblical texts quoted], in which case a saint's interpretation might be considered more authoratative by way of personal holiness of life and communion with God, but just a direct qotation from the Holy Scriptures ...

SP, I do know that St. Nikolaj wrote even more against Bogobornih Srba then Bogobornih Jevreja* and indeed he did that very often. There was not many children that made him happy.

But, I do not find that clear distinction between ordinary Jews and Militant Zionists that is needed to be presented by him for us small-minded, that tend to take things and push them to the limit. It is not just the oppinion of St. Nikolaj that I am opposed to as is presented (I would even go to say that if t was placed properly and clearly into the context of Militant Zionism, I really do not I would have any problems with that kind of address).

The problem also is what today's Serbs get out of his word. Today's Serbs are very ready to accuse everyone and all for everything. To us everyone is guilty just not us. I am sure that in many many cases others are guilty, but in our atheistic attitude and lack of Svetosavlja in all aspects of our existence as a Society no-one is at fault but us.

So, I do not think that he wrote wisely in placing objects without clear distinction.

When it comes to his word about Bogobornim Srbima, I think that no one can have any problems with that, as St. Nikolaj was a Serb. Every Serb has a right to criticise Serbs, time will prove whether that criticism is right or wrong. But for a non Jew, St. Nikolaj's rhetoric is rather strong, don't you think? Especially for this kind of forum. If here were all Serbs we could argue without anyone being offended, but this forum is not the place to present those more sensitive views.

I agree with you on many a thing being a Serb, but also as a Jew I do have a need to look into what St. Nikolaj wrote with some sense of caution. I think, that the most questionable writings of this great person came during the last days in Dachau. Now, I am not sure, but there were many that came out of Conc. Lagers that did "develop" sense of antisemitism, as much as this seems illogical.

I don't see that that any "interpretation" was offered from the quoted Pauline text, in which case a saint's interpretation might be considered more authoratative by way of personal holiness of life and communion with God, but just a direct qotation from the Holy Scriptures ...??... perhaps you could clarify?

Good point. Let me clarify. Since I posted the writings of Saint Nikolaj Velimirovic, if someone wants to say that they contradict the scriptures, they have to do more than just post elements of the scriptures, or even post them and interpret them themselves. Personal interpretation of scripture by ordinary people means nothing to me. If it did, I would be a protestant advocate of sola scriptura. One quote I remember of this Saint is that he said he gave up his whole life to the study of the scriptures. You can then understand why someone posting an element of the scriptures does not change anything for me. I could myself try and interprate the scriptures in a way that supports the view of this Saint, but it can be taken to mean many things depending on what you want to believe. Therefore I would avoid all reference to the scripture that involves my or anyone elses personl interpretation. I will not question the validity of what was written by this Saint unless it contradicts reason, and/or the views of the Church, including the Patriarch and Holy Synod. They have not only NOT denounced his works, but they concluded before they canonised him that his views were consistent with that of traditional church teachings. That for me is the end of the story. No personal biblical interpretations can change that.

if someone wants to say that they contradict the scriptures, they have to do more than just post elements of the scriptures, or even post them and interpret them themselves. Personal interpretation of scripture by ordinary people means nothing to me. ...... No personal biblical interpretations can change that.

No personal interpretation was offered. I simply quoted the Scriptures, and for some peculiar reason, you object to this....I wonder why?

SP, I do know that St. Nikolaj wrote even more against Bogobornih Srba then Bogobornih Jevreja* and indeed he did that very often. There was not many children that made him happy.

But, I do not find that clear distinction between ordinary Jews and Militant Zionists that is needed to be presented by him for us small-minded, that tend to take things and push them to the limit. It is not just the oppinion of St. Nikolaj that I am opposed to as is presented (I would even go to say that if t was placed properly and clearly into the context of Militant Zionism, I really do not I would have any problems with that kind of address).

Quote

Thats what Im trying to say though. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The reason he doesn't use the word zionist is because he is also referring to those atheistic jews that have no interest in it. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š He has labelled these two groups together as jews. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Generalisation you might say, but historically these two groups have in his eyes contributed to many detrimental events to Christianity. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Clearly he thinks that a large enough portion of them contributed to the downfall of Christianity that he could label them as jewish, rather than completely unrelated individuals who just happened to work together.

The problem also is what today's Serbs get out of his word. Today's Serbs are very ready to accuse everyone and all for everything. To us everyone is guilty just not us.

I agree. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š But on the other side you have the Serbs that find everyone else innocent and look down upon their fellow Serbs as the causes of all our problems. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I know Serbs that think that we were to blame for the 1990 wars, and that the US had our best interests at heart. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š We must be careful to be niether arrogant or act superior and to accept that we have sinned, but also to recognise external or internal enemies that have also helped bring about the current situation.

When it comes to his word about Bogobornim Srbima, I think that no one can have any problems with that, as St. Nikolaj was a Serb. Every Serb has a right to criticise Serbs, time will prove whether that criticism is right or wrong. But for a non Jew, St. Nikolaj's rhetoric is rather strong, don't you think?

I don't think that as a Serb he only has a right to criticise Serbs. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Furthermore if there are percieved enemies, it becomes not just a right but a duty to make this apparent. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š His rhetoric is strong, but I cannot just from that conclude that it is unjustified.

Especially for this kind of forum. If here were all Serbs we could argue without anyone being offended, but this forum is not the place to present those more sensitive views.

Yes I do see that. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It it is not the primary duty of an Orthodox Christian to keep talking about percieved enemies, or he will forget about himself. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š However when I posted the article about the monk Paisos it was others that forced me to defend this position in particular. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I never drew any particular attention to any part of the article where the zionists were mentioned. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š So I understand that many could get the wrong idea, but that is indeed why i am trying to clarify and justify what I post. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I cannot as a rational human being accept that certain topics are beyond discussion, if I believe them to be true. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

I agree with you on many a thing being a Serb, but also as a Jew I do have a need to look into what St. Nikolaj wrote with some sense of caution. I think, that the most questionable writings of this great person came during the last days in Dachau. Now, I am not sure, but there were many that came out of Conc. Lagers that did "develop" sense of antisemitism, as much as this seems illogical.

True, but St. Nikolajs views are consistent from start to finish, including from well before he was in Dachau, to long after he left. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š By all means approach with caution, but don't let this stop you reading it at all, as has been the case with some that run a mile when they see the word zionist or jew.

CANONIZING THE 'PROPHET' OF ANTI-SEMITISM: THE APOTHEOSIS OF BISHOP NIKOLAJ VELIMIROVIC AND THE LEGITIMIZATION OF RELIGIOUS ANTI-SEMITISM IN CONTEMPORARY SERBIAN SOCIETY (Part 1)*

By Jovan Byford

On 19 May 2003, the Council of Bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church announced its "unanimous and undisputed decision" to "include the name of Nikolaj (Velimirovic), Bishop of Ohrid and Zica, in the calendar of saints of the holy [Serbian] Orthodox Church." The announcement stated that, in canonizing Bishop Velimirovic, the council "solemnly confirmed the widespread belief in his sanctity which exists not only within the Serbian Church but throughout the Orthodox World" (Information Service of the Serbian Orthodox Church, 2003). The magnitude of the importance attributed to the new saint was reflected in the decision to allocate two days in the church calendar to his veneration: 18 March, the day of Velimirovic's death in exile in the United States in 1956; and 3 May, the day in 1991 when his remains were brought back to Serbia and laid to rest in his native village of Lelic.

The formal canonization ceremony was held at the Temple of Saint Sava in central Belgrade only five days after the initial announcement. The special liturgy was officiated by Patriarch Pavle of the Serbian Orthodox Church in the presence of all 28 Serbian bishops and several thousand faithful. The sacred remains (mosti) of the new saint were transported to Belgrade especially for this occasion and were displayed in an open casket to be worshipped by members of the public.

The inclusion of the name of Nikolaj Velimirovic (1881-1956) in the diptych of Serbian saints revived the long-standing public debate surrounding the merits of the bishop's contribution to Orthodox Christianity and to Serbian culture as a whole. Underpinning the debate is the fact that Serbia's new national saint is a controversial historical figure. As critics on the liberal left frequently point out, Velimirovic was one of the principal ideologues of 1930s Serbian fascism, whose clerical nationalist, antimodernist, and anti-Semitic religious writings continue to inspire the forces of the Christian right in present-day Serbian society (Popov, 1993; Djordjevic 1996, 2003; Byford and Billig, 2001; Byford, 2002, 2003).

In spite of the controversy surrounding his life and work, a substantial proportion of Orthodox Serbs regard Velimirovic as one of the most important national religious figures since medieval times. Velimirovic's books are widely available in Serbia's bookshops and are said to have sold over 1 million copies over the past 10 years. Also, a number of representatives of Serbia's mainstream political establishment, including a former president of Yugoslavia and one of Serbia's most popular politicians, Vojislav Kostunica, have publicly expressed a positive opinion of Velimirovic's religious philosophy (e.g., Kostunica, 2003).

A recent study of representations of Bishop Nikolaj in contemporary Serbian culture has demonstrated that the widespread apotheosis of Nikolaj Velimirovic -- in the face of ongoing controversy -- entails a significant amount of social forgetting. In popular representations of Velimirovic's life and work, contentious elements of his biography are routinely repressed and replaced with more favorable and selective interpretations that conceal the Bishop's anti-Semitic leanings (Byford, 2004). In that sense, the popular adulation of the bishop can be said to continue in spite of, rather than because of, his contentious views.

The dynamic of repression evident in public discourse is absent from right-wing extremist and anti-Semitic literature where Bishop Nikolaj's controversial writings are explicitly invoked to support clerical-nationalist, neofascist, and anti-Semitic ideological claims (Djurdjevic, 1997, 2002; Krstic, 2002). For this reason, in contemporary Serbia the authority of Nikolaj Velimirovic can be said to represent the meeting point between mainstream Orthodox culture, which represses and seeks to downplay his controversial political orientation, and the exponents of the Christian right, whose claim to legitimacy is based precisely on the "forgotten" aspects of the Bishop's literary output. Importantly however, the popularity of Nikolaj Velimirovic, which stretches across the political spectrum, blurs the boundaries between the mainstream and the extreme in Serbian religious discourse. The continuing veneration of Nikolaj Velimirovic and the reluctance by church authorities to address the controversy surrounding his writings has been shown to implicitly -- and for the most part inadvertently -- legitimize political extremism and facilitate the promulgation of anti-Jewish prejudice in contemporary Serbia (Byford, 2002, 2004).

The present paper proposes to examine this dynamic further, using as an example the campaign for Velimirovic's canonization. In considering in more detail the construction of the bishop's sanctity over the past 15 years or so, it will be suggested that, while the campaign for canonization consistently overlooked Velimirovic's anti-Semitism, certain constructions of the new saint's holiness are intrinsically tied to the controversy surrounding his earthly existence. This includes the claims that Velimirovic had been graced with special mystical powers --those of epiphany, prophecy, and healing -- that are regarded, within the Christian tradition, as important characteristics of saints. The article explores the ways in which the assertions about the "mystical" dimension of Velimirovic's personal history endows the anti-Semitic aspect of his ideology with unwarranted significance and helps maintain anti-Jewish rhetoric on the visible margin of contemporary Serbian religious discourse.

1. The Controversy Surrounding Velimirovic's Life And His Anti-Semitic 'Words To The Serbian People Through The Dungeon Window'In the first half of the 20th century, Nikolaj Velimirovic, Bishop of Ohrid and Zica, was one of the most highly regarded of Serbian clerics, renowned as much for his nationalist fervor as for his charisma, oratorical skills, and scholarship. In the 1930s, at the pinnacle of his career as a priest, theologian, and evangelist, Velimirovic emerged as the principal voice of Christian nationalism in Serbia. He advocated the establishment of a society founded on Orthodox Christian traditions, and a uniquely Serbian form of religious nationalism and monarchism (Popov, 1993, Subotic, 1993, 1996). Also, Velimirovic propagated the rejection of "all foreign customs and superficial Western traditions" (Radosavljevic, 1986, p. 14) including individualism, equality, religious tolerance, democracy, and other values of modernity and enlightenment.

The anti-Westernism and antimodernism apparent in Velimirovic's writings were suffused with strong anti-Semitic sentiments that permeated his religious thinking from the mid-1920s (Janic, 1999; Djordjevic, 1996). The anti-Jewish and anti-Judaic references consisted of a blend of religious anti-Semitism, which has a long history in (Orthodox) Christianity (Poliakov, 1974), and the 19th-century anti-Semitic conspiratorial tradition whose popularity culminated across Europe in the decades preceding World War II (Cohn, 1957; Pipes, 1998). In Velimirovic's writings, Jews are routinely portrayed as Christ-killers and a cursed people who betrayed God, but also as a powerful satanic force conspiring against Christian Europe (Velimirovic, 1976, 1977, 1985, 2000).

In the 1930s, Velimirovic's ideology provided an important source of inspiration for the forces of Serbian fascism, epitomized by the notorious movement Zbor, founded in 1934 by the pro-Nazi politician Dimitrije Ljotic. Zbor was the most enthusiastic and active collaborationist organization in Serbia during the years of Nazi occupation (Martic, 1980, Stefanovic, 1984). In one of his last interviews, published in the United States in the 1950s, Velimirovic insisted that he was the spiritual leader and eminence grise of Serbian populism exemplified by Ljotic's Zbor. Velimirovic intimated that Ljotic was his "pupil and faithful follower in Christ" who, in the overall Christian nationalist project, was merely "passing the incense burner" (cited in Popov, 1993, p. 6).

In spite of demonstrable ideological links with Zbor and its leader in the prewar years, Velimirovic -- unlike Ljotic -- refused to collaborate with the Nazis during the occupation. There are indications that, before the war, German authorities regarded the bishop -- a committed nationalist and anticommunist -- as a potential candidate for collaboration. Nonetheless, Velimirovic refused to support the occupying force (Dzomic, 2003, J. Radosavljevic, 2003). In July 1941, he was arrested on suspicion of links with Chetnik insurgents, and was remanded under house arrest in a Serbian monastery, first at Ljubostinja and then at Vojlovica. In September 1944, as German troops began to lose ground in the war against the Partisans, Velimirovic, accompanied by the Serbian Patriarch Gavrilo Dozic (who was also in German custody since the beginning of the war), was transferred abroad, first to Austria and then to Germany. Eventually, the two senior Serbian clerics ended up at the notorious concentration camp at Dachau, where they were remanded as "honorary prisoners" (Ehrenhaeftling) for just under three months. Velimirovic's and Dozic's release in December 1944 appears to have been part of a political deal struck between the prime minister of the Serbian collaborationist government Milan Nedic and the German envoy for the Balkans Hermann Neubacher (Petranovic, 1983; Kostic, 1991; Parezanin, 1971).

In recent decades, the brief internment at Dachau in 1944 has been used by Velimirovic's supporters to construct the image of their hero as a martyr and a victim of brutal Nazi persecution (e.g., A. Radosavljevic, 1986, 2003; Marjanovic, 1990; Velimirovic, 1991; see Byford, 2004 for the analysis of this "martyrdom myth"). This has been the case despite the fact that, as honorary prisoners, Velimirovic and Dozic never endured "enormous suffering and torture," as alleged in contemporary biographical accounts (see Tomanic, 2001). The persistent emphasis on the bishop's suffering at Dachau has been shown to serve an important function in the popularization of Velimirovic's work. The ubiquitous narrative of martyrdom acts as a "replacement myth" that diverts attention away from an important controversy surrounding this period of the bishop's life. It represses the fact that at Dachau, for reasons that defy rational explanation, Velimirovic wrote some of his most anti-Semitic material.

Velimirovic's notes from Dachau, which he is said to have written surreptitiously on scraps of (toilet) paper, were assembled and edited only in the 1980s by his nephew, the former bishop of Sabac and Valjevo, Jovan Velimirovic. The work was first published in Germany in 1985 by the then Serbian Orthodox bishop of Western Europe, Lavrentije Trifunovic, under the title "Words to the Serbian People Through the Dungeon Window" (Velimirovic, 1985). The principal message of the book is that World War II was the inevitable consequence of the secularization of "godless Europe." Velimirovic also attributed the tragic fate of Serbs during the war to their betrayal of God and Christian traditions in favor of the much-maligned European culture.

Behind the secular, de-Christianized European values anathematized in the book, Velimirovic cites Jewish influence. He claims that "all modern ideas including democracy, and strikes, and socialism, and atheism, and religious tolerance, and pacifism, and global revolution, and capitalism, and communism" are the inventions of "Jews, or rather their father, the Devil" (Velimirovic, 1985, p.194). Even more controversially, in the book Velimirovic reflects implicitly on the plight of Jews during World War II. He interprets their suffering as divine retribution for the murder of Christ:

"Because they have shown themselves to be worse enemies of God than godless Pilate, because in the heat of the battle they uttered those terrible words: 'His blood on us and our children.' That is when the innocent blood became the whip that drives them like cattle through centuries and from land to land, and the fire that burns all their warehouses of plots against Christ. Because that is what the devil, their father, taught them" (Velimirovic, 1985, p.194).

Because of statements like this, "Words to the Serbian People..." has acquired a special status in critical literature on Velimirovic, where it is treated as the epitome of Bishop Nikolaj's prejudice and hatred towards Jews and Judaism (David, 1991; Djordjevic, 1996; Byford and Billig, 2001; Lebl, 2003).

In contrast, in religious publications and ecclesiastical discourse, the status of the book is more complex. In accounts of Velimirovic's life, the creative endeavor at the camp is conveniently obscured by the broader theme of suffering that dominates the biographical narratives. In other contexts however, "Words to the Serbian People..." is attributed great importance, and is even regarded as occupying a privileged position in Velimirovic's opus. As will become apparent, the reasons for this are closely linked to Velimirovic's assumed status as a "man of God" and a saint.

2. Velimirovic's Status After World War II And His Rehabilitation In The 1980sIn the aftermath of World War II, Velimirovic immigrated to the United States, where he died in 1956. Back in his homeland, he was dismissed by the communist authorities as a "clerical-nationalist" and a "traitor." His citizenship was revoked and his name included on an unofficial list of authors whose work could not be openly published in the country. Also, until the late-1980s, Velimirovic was regularly subjected to attacks in the national press, where he was portrayed as a "fascist" (Miletic, 1972), "the darkest individual in the history of Serbian people" (Simic, 1986), and even as a "war criminal" (Jaksic, 1981).

This state of affairs persisted until the rise of Serbian nationalism in the late 1980s, when a small group of Velimirovic's supporters within the Serbian Orthodox Church led by three ambitious nationalist theologians Amfilohije Radovic, Artemije Radosavljevic, and Atanasije Jevtic emerged as a prominent force within the ecclesiastical establishment (Tomanic, 2001; Radic, 2002; Perica, 2002). Together with other nationalist institutions such as the Serbian Academy of Arts and Sciences and the Serbian Union of Writers, the right-wing clergy -- followers of Nikolaj Velimirovic -- became the principal voice of Serbian ethnic nationalism. By 1991, Radovic, Jevtic, and Radosavljevic had all been ordained as bishops, and since then they have been wielding considerable influence within the Serbian Orthodox Church.

The newly acquired status of Velimirovic's supporters within the Church enabled them to embark on an intensive public campaign aimed at rehabilitating their hero. The campaign consisted of measures aimed at imposing positive interpretations of Nikolaj's life on public memory. In 1985, Bishop Jovan of Sabac and Valjevo founded the religious journal "Glas Crkve" (Voice of the Church), which was devoted to the popularization of Velimirovic's writings. In 1986, Atanasije Jevtic privately published the book "The New Chrysostom" by Artemije Radosavljevic, the first affirmative biography of Velimirovic written since World War II. In the late 1980s, "Glas Crkve" became the first publishing house in postcommunist Serbia to print Velimirovic's books.

In addition to various publishing activities, the Diocese of Sabac and Valjevo organized regular commemorative ceremonies dedicated to Velimirovic, including the transport in May 1991 of his remains from the United States to Serbia. All of these events were endorsed, attended, and publicized by the likes of Jevtic, Radovic, and Radosavljevic, as well as by the country's nationalist political and cultural elite.

Efforts aimed at restoring Velimirovic's reputation went hand in hand with the campaign to have him canonized. In fact, many of Velimirovic's advocates, both within the church and outside it, viewed canonization as the ultimate objective of their endeavors, as a symbolic act that would irrevocably confirm the bishop's return into the spiritual life of the Serbian nation, and mark the end of 40 years of vilification.

3. The First Stage Of The Campaign For Canonization: The Making Of A Religious 'Cult'In the Orthodox Church, unlike in the Roman Catholic tradition, there are no formal procedures associated with canonization. Proclamation of saints is not preceded by a formal diocesan inquiry, sessions by the Congregation for the Causes for Canonization, or well-defined courses of action regarding the verification of miracles. Also, no distinction is made between "beatification" and "canonization." The Orthodox churches are believed to follow the tradition of early Christendom, when canonization was the means by which ecclesiastical authorities simply formalized the veneration of a martyr or a confessor already worshipped as such by the wider community of faithful. Slobodan Mileusnic, curator of the Museum of the Serbian Orthodox Church and one of the leading experts on Serbian saints, suggests for instance that "as opposed to the [Catholic] Western Church, which declares its saints through an almost administrative process, the Serbian Orthodox Church merely sanctions a cult that already exists" (cited in Grujic, 2000. See also Mileusnic, 2000; J. Velimirovic, 1991; Jevtic, 1987).

The less stringent rules for canonization in the Orthodox world are regarded by many Serbian clerics as the only authentic and apposite practice of declaring saints. In 1987, Archimandrite Atanasije Jevtic dismissed formal procedures followed by the Vatican as "papal innovation" and "frivolity before God" (Jevtic, 1987, p. 30).

Because of the enduring and widespread belief that canonization represents little more than an ecclesiastical formality by means of which the church ratifies an existing cult, in the early stages of the social construction of Velimirovic's sanctity in the late 1980s, Velimirovic's supporters invested considerable effort into demonstrating the existence of a "living cult" devoted to the bishop. Articles published in "Glas Crkve" and speeches delivered at commemorative ceremonies organized in Velimirovic's honor regularly emphasized the extensive veneration of Nikolaj among Serbs, which was said to date back to the 1950s. Public gatherings, commemorations, celebrations, literary evenings, etc. that were part of the campaign for rehabilitation were routinely interpreted as evidence for the vast following that Velimirovic has among the Serbian people. Although most of these events were organized by the pro-Velimirovic clique within the Serbian church, and were attended by a small proportion of the public, they were nonetheless flagged as reflecting the "will of the people," and as manifestations of the overwhelming public adulation of the bishop.

A key event in the popularization of Velimirovic's cult took place on the 31st anniversary of the bishop's death in March 1987. On this occasion, priests from the Diocese of Sabac and Valjevo -- led by Bishops Jovan Velimirovic and Amfilohije Radovic -- informally canonized Nikolaj and declared 18 March, the day of his death, a religious holiday in the diocese. An article published shortly afterward in "Glas Crkve" -- whose editors promptly adopted "Holy Bishop Nikolaj" as the journal's patron saint -- applauded the informal nature of this act and relished in its spontaneous and populist character. The article emphasized that the canonization "was not declared from the pulpit" but reflected the "will of the whole of the Serbian nation" (Rankovic, 1987, p. 26).

The unofficial canonization -- which, according to Archimandrite Atanasije Jevtic, was consistent with "the traditions of the Orthodox Church" (Jevtic, 1987, p. 31) -- helped to promote, institutionalize, and in some sense reify the alleged cult surrounding Velimirovic's name. Albeit unsanctioned by the Synod or the Council of Bishops, the canonization legitimized the emerging practices of referring to Velimirovic as the "Holy Bishop," the production of religious icons bearing his image, and even the building of chapels and churches in his honor. Also, this contentious decision was flagged as the "first step on the road to [full] canonization" (Velimirovic, 1991, p. 22). In that sense, it was a calculated attempt to put pressure on the higher church authorities to consider what was identified as the "will of the people" and formally declare Bishop Nikolaj a national saint.

* This article is part of a larger research project on the rehabilitation of Bishop Nikolaj Velimirovic in contemporary Serbian society funded by the Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Antisemitism, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel. The article is published with that institute's permission.

Jovan Byford is lecturer in Social Psychology in the Department of Social Sciences at Nottingham Trent University, United Kingdom.

Byford, J. 2003, "Antisemitism and the Christian Right in Post-Milosevic Serbia: From Conspiracy Theory to Hate Crime" in "Internet Journal of Criminology," Vol. 1, pp. 1-27.

Byford, J., 2004, "From 'Traitor' to 'Saint' in Public Memory: The Case of Serbian Bishop Nikolaj Velimirovic" in "ACTA" (Analysis of Current Trends in Antisemitism), No. 22 (Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The Vidal Sassoon Center for the Study of Antisemitism).

Byford, J. and Billig M., 2001, "The Emergence of Anti-Semitic Conspiracy Theories in Yugoslavia During the War with Nato" in "Patterns of Prejudice," Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 51-63.

Cohn, N., 1957, "Warrant for Genocide: The Myth of the Jewish World Conspiracy and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion" (London: Secker and Warburg).

Radosavljevic, J., 2003, "Zivot i Stradanje Zice i Studenice pred rat, pod okupacijom i posle rata" [Life and the Destruction of Zica and Studenica Before, During and After the Occupation] (Novi Sad: Beseda).

St Andrew of Crete calls the Jews, the children of darkness. St Kosmas calls them God-haters. The chosen people killed God. This has to have cosmic signficance. The Holy Orthodox Church condemns Judaism. (Read the verses for Holy Week). For the PC-minded , our Holy Faith is "anti-semitic". So be it. You can't be chosen by God and then kill HIm and then expect in 2005 to be excused on the grounds that it is not nice to be unpleasant to people. America is in therapy at the moment. When the naughty Arabs did 911, the conservative, men with balls, called for reprisals, but the libs went on therapy. "Lets show and tell like good Dr Spock... sorry I upset you my Moslem brother etc..." The Jews are responsible for world chaos, having killed God. Get into your Lib brains that this means big trouble on an historical and cosmic level. You killed the Emperor and Darth Vader is going to get your for it!

Jew means Judist, i.e. one who practices the heresy of Judaism. I am anti-Jew but NOT contra Jews. Work that one out my Lib brethren! (especially Mr TomS).

The Jews are responsible for world chaos, having killed God.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Get into your Lib brains that this means big trouble on an historical and cosmic level.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š You killed the Emperor and Darth Vader is going to get your for it!

Such Love! This must be the Holy Spirit speaking through you (not!)So, the Death of Our Lord was not voluntary then?ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And there is a Manichean "duality" going on?Friend, thou speakest heresy. I will hold to the Orthodox Faith of my fathers thank you very much.

"Watch out, the Libs and the Jewish boogie men are coming to getchya!"

« Last Edit: July 03, 2005, 01:31:14 AM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

I affirm the distinction between religious Jew and ethnic Jew. It's one that is not often enough articulated explicitly today, and that is to our discredit, as it makes us appear to be attacking someone because of their genetics and not critiquing them because of their religion. But here's the thing, some of this stuff that is being mentioned does attack people because of their genetics; that's why it's unacceptable. All people are made in the image of God, and all people are born inherently capable of doing good (made after the likeness of God) and without sin. No ethnic group is born with a much greater tendency to sin. Even when God had a "chosen people, " God didn't play favorites as far as race went, making some people blessed or cursed solely because of their race (actually it was a "mixed multitude" that came out of Egypt, so Israel was a mixed bag from the beginning).

This may be the first time anyone has ever mistaken me for a lib. I must be mellowing in my old age.

This is a very difficult topic to discuss because of the emotions involved, and because it all goes against the grain of the western zeitgeist so to speak.

As it stands, we're not a culture accustomed to speaking plainly, unflatteringly of ideas - and even when we do, if such speach is not couched in syrupy irenicism to the point of being made impotent, then it is dismissed, a priori.

Serbian Patriot, you will have no luck discussing this here. I'm not saying you're in the wrong because of that, simply stating a fact you must have observed by now.

This is a very difficult topic to discuss because of the emotions involved, and because it all goes against the grain of the western zeitgeist so to speak.

As it stands, we're not a culture accustomed to speaking plainly, unflatteringly of ideas - and even when we do, if such speach is not couched in syrupy irenicism to the point of being made impotent, then it is dismissed, a priori.

Serbian Patriot, you will have no luck discussing this here.ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I'm not saying you're in the wrong because of that, simply stating a fact you must have observed by now.

I certainly have experienced that brother!! But this very issue is what inspired me to become a member of this site. In the past week especially I have been reading the book that I quote at the start, and it is unbelievable how many answers to various questions it has given me. This Saint was truly great, and I mean to make his thoughts and views known in what little capacity I have. A lot if not most of the people on this site live in America, and I know that many will do exactly as you say- dismiss the ideas simply because I am speaking plainly without pandering to their world view. If I was to not try and stand my ground despite this then these type of people have all the more free reign to extinguish other peoples views (even the views of numerous Saints) in the future. Therefore I will continue to post passages written by this great Saint, and truly I hope that people will see using their God-given brain that he speaks the truth.

Where there is great joy there is also great sorrow. Enormous joy for people when God appeared on this earth. Enormous sorrow when people fell away from God and returned to the service of satan. This tradgedy resulted from the non-Orthodox West, and for two reasons. The first is hatred towards the heretical clergy, and the second as a result from hatred against Jews. Both these hatreds arose in the hearts of Western humanity from the same seed. And that seed was the attempt by the Christian clergy and the Jews to completely control peoples lives and states in every possible sphere. (Note by SP: he is referring to the Catholic Church and Jews seperately, not conspiring together so to speak. I just couldn't translate it that well). The hatred of such a clergy translated into a hatred for the church, and the hatred towards Jews resulted in hatred towards Christ.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------It was from the Jewish nation that he was rejected and as a result of the Jewish nation that he was crucified. What more can I say? If someone is against the Jews, how can he be against Christ, against whom Jews have been battling for 2000 years? But where satans claws are embedded, there can be no logic.Led by a hatred of the clergy and Jews, the Western nations little by little rejected Christ, until the present days where they have totally removed him from every branch of national life and every state institution, and have limited him only to our Churches. From him that rose from the dead and said: 'Every power on heaven and earth give unto me', these blinded people have taken away every power. But not just power, but influence. In the fields, in the schools, in society, in the state, in politics, in art, in international relations, in science, in literature and in everything else, the influence of Christ is absent.God is not to be toyed with. Whenever men, as guests in Gods house, become rude there has to be a punishment as a warning from God. God has sent two horrific warnings, these are the two world wars within tweny years of each other. May the Christian nations kneel before the injured Saviour and return to him the power, respect, glory and honour which belongs only to him. Do this my Orthodox brothers, if you want to save yourselves from a third world war more horrific than either of the last two. From Christ I wish you health and salvation, and from you to Christ glory and thanks for ever more. Amen

"His blood be upon us and our children". The covenant is broken. The Talmud replaces the OT. Curren Judaism is no longer related to what we believe. I don't know what Persian dark and light have to do with the historical fact that the Judists have caused trouble since then. They were banned from Russia for hundreds of years. I suspect living in the the Land of OZ, you have succumbed to the current Zeitgeist of PC-ism. If you read Russian, read Metropolitan Ioann of Leningrad on this issue.

This is a very difficult topic to discuss because of the emotions involved, and because it all goes against the grain of the western zeitgeist so to speak.

Quite the contrary, I believe that I (and others here) have spoken quite plainly, and without any particular emotion or subconscious bias. Both here and at the Cafe (e.g,. on this thread), I have made a number of posts trying to grapple with this issue, and I believe your above statement to be little more than a cheap shot. Just because many people unthinkingly make reactionary statements when this subject comes up, that doesn't mean that we are doing that because we have somehow been duped by the very culture/mindset that we are supposedly protecting/defending.

Just because many people unthinkingly make reactionary statements when this subject comes up, that doesn't mean that we are doing that because we have somehow been duped by the very culture/mindset that we are supposedly protecting/defending.

Well if people are, as you say, UNTHINKINGLY making REACTIONARY statements when this topic comes up, they are not behaving rationally or reasonably. What other possible reason can there be for this strange occurence other than that their mind has been programmed to do this by the 'culture' they are supposed to be protecting?

Have you no fear of God? even when the Divine Apostle St. Paul admonishes you in the eleventh chapter of his epistle to the Romans by telling you that Christian Gentiles ought not to be boastful and contemptuous toward unbelieving Jews. For Israel's heritage is holy and ought to make Christians humble. Jewish tradition and righteous Jews are the root (verse 16). Gentile believers are a wild branch grafted in (verse 17). Thus, the Church is one with Israel, and it's consummation, it's ultimate fruition, the fulfillment of Israel when he says:For if the firstfruit is holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root is holy, so are the branches. And if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were grafted in among them, and with them became a partaker of the root and fatness of the olive tree, do not boast against the branches. But if you do boast, remember that you do not support the root, but the root supports you. (Romans 11:16-18)

Have you no fear of God? even when the Divine Apostle St. Paul admonishes by telling you that while God is saving the Gentiles between the Two Comings of Christ, he censures Gentile conceit by revealing a "mystery" (verse 25) that God is saving the elect among the Jews also, so that "All Israel will be saved" (verse 26) when he says:"For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š "The Deliverer will come out of Zion, ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š For this is My covenant with them, ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š When I take away their sins." " (Romans 11:25-27)

And have you no fear of God when again the Divine Apostle admonishes you by saying:"Concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election, they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable." (Romans 11:28-29)

« Last Edit: July 04, 2005, 08:13:56 AM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Quite the contrary, I believe that I (and others here) have spoken quite plainly, and without any particular emotion or subconscious bias. Both here and at the Cafe (e.g,. on this thread), I have made a number of posts trying to grapple with this issue, and I believe your above statement to be little more than a cheap shot. Just because many people unthinkingly make reactionary statements when this subject comes up, that doesn't mean that we are doing that because we have somehow been duped by the very culture/mindset that we are supposedly protecting/defending.

I'm sorry to see you've decided to take a generalization (which I believe to be an accurate one) to be a specific condemnation of you. Frankly, you didn't even cross my mind when I was typing my original reply in this thread.

Sons inherit the sins of their fathers and have to pay for them. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š If the sons do not redeem themselves, then their own sons and grandsons will suffer the consequences. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The debt has to be repaid. That is the law everywhere on earth and in every society on earth. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The son inherits the illnesses of his father. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š If he does not cure himself from that illness then the illness will be passed on to his son, or grandson, or great-grandson, up to the fourth generation.If the son 'pays back' all the 'debts' of his father, then his descendants will be happy. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š If the son cures himself of his fathers illness, his descendants will be healthy.Oh brothers of mine, the 18th century is the father of the 19th century, and the 19th century is the father of the 20th century. The father sinned and indebted himself greatly. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The son did not pay back this 'debt', but fell even further into 'debt', and this fell on the grandson. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The father was infected with a terrible 'illness', but the son didn't cure this illness from himself and his 'illness' became even greater than that of his fathers. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š This 'illness' was passed on to, and affected the grandson with three times the strength of the original illness.The 18th century witnessed a rebellion against the Church and clergy of Catholicism. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The 19th century witnessed a rebellion against God. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The 20th century witnessed a pact with the devil. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The 'debts' have grown and the 'illness' has spread. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š And the Lord said that the sins of the father are transferred to his descendants all the way to the fourth generation. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Do you not see how God has treated the grandsons, because of the sins of their European grand-fathers? Do you not see the whip on the grand-children because of the unpaid 'debts' of the grand-fathers?The anti-Christ emperor represents the start of the 19th century. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The anti-Christ Pope represents the middle of the 19th century. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š European anti-Christ philosophers represent the end of the 19th century. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Bonaparte, Pius, and Nietzsche. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Three disastrous names, three disturbed individuals, three inherited illnesses.Are they the victors of the 19th century? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š No, they are the biggest inheritors of the illnesses of the 18th century....Cesar the emperor and philosopher. Not even in pagan Rome, but in the middle of Christian Europe! ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š They are not the victors, but the defeated. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š When Bonaparte laughed at the holy relics in the Kremlin, and when Pius declared himself infallible, and when Nietzsche declared himself in the service of anti-Christ- then the sun went down... Look at this never before seen series of events: an atheist emperor, an atheist Pope, and an atheist philosopher. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The 18th century sentanced Christ to death. The 19th century crucified Christ all over again. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The 20th century declared Christ dead, and claimed that he did not rise from the dead. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Why then are you surprised brothers, that whips of unheard of fury are beating down on Europe?...Who are then the victors, if Cesar, the Pope, or the philosopher are not? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The victors are the Russian and Serbian peasants. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š In the words of Christ: ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š 'Who is the smallest among you, he is the biggest' /Luke 9,48/. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Who were the most unheard of, the most insignificant, and the smallest in the 19th century, in the century of great Bonaparte, the infallible Pius and presumptous Nietzsche? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Who can it be but the Russian and Serbian peasant-warriors who fought for their holy places ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š and freed Russia from secular Europe, and Serbia from Muslim hegemony?Demonic wars, demonic clergy, and demonic philosophy- those are the emperor, the Pope and the philosopher of the 19th centruy. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š The Serbian peasant represented the very opposite to all this: ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Firstly, cross-bearing heroism, secondly a clergy of martyrs, and thirdly a simple fishermans apostolic wisdom. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š On these simple peasants, the same words of our Lord Christ echo again: 'I thank you Lord, the Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden this from the overly wise and rational, and have declared it to the ordinary people'/Mathew 11,25/. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š What did God declare to these ordinary peasants? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š He declared masculine bravery, heavenly holiness, and Godly wisdom. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š He gave them the exact opposite to the western emperor, pope and philosopher. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It was totally opposite, like night and day.Oh my brothers, hold fast to the eternal victors, and not to the eternal losers. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Hold fast to matyrdom...Amen

Because I fear God, I should repress logic and the rightings of holy father? A totally irrelevant and provocative statement. I would like to see declare infront of the SOC's holy synod, has Saint Nikolaj no fear of God. I think you would be chased out like a demon from the posssessed.

even when the Divine Apostle St. Paul admonishes you in the eleventh chapter of his epistle to the Romans by telling you that Christian Gentiles ought not to be boastful and contemptuous toward unbelieving Jews.

Who is boasting? No body is being contemptful simply because they are Jews. Realise this once and for all! It is not just because they are Jews, it is because of what they have done. Im sorry you consider your interpretation of Holy Scriptures more valid than a Saints. Keep quoting as many verses as you can possibly come up with, but realise you are not contradicting me, you are contradicting a Saint. Infact many Saints and Holy fathers, but in this instance Saint Nikolaj.

St Nikolaj is indeed a Saint, but you have turned him into an idol, as you have your "patriotism".I knew you would question "my interpretation" of the Scriptures, but in fact it is the interpretation given in the footnotes of the Orthodox Study Bible pp365-366.St. Nikolaj was wrong on this point- it doesn't make him any less a Saint. St. Gregory of Nyssa was also wrong in his origenist ideas, but he is still a Saint.

This is now my second and last admonishment. For the last time I beg you to turn away from this error.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Beside the fact that you will search in vain to find any Church Father who supports the philo-Judaic understanding of this topic being promoted by certain persons in this forum, consider what the Scriptures say when not read selectively...

"I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan" (Apocalypse 2:9)

"Behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie--behold, I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and learn that I have loved you." (Apocalypse 3:9)

14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea; for you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews,15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all men16 by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved--so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last! (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)

And all the people answered, "His blood be on us and on our children!" ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š (St.Matthew 27:25)

etc., etc.

In other words, giving a one-sided and isolated treatment of this topic by citing St.Paul's positive sayings regarding the Jews as a "people" is very misleading - in particular when one confounds the "holy root" (which is the Patriarchs and Prophets - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, etc. etc.) with those who are living as students of the "sages" and institutions/religious philosophy which not only applauded (and directly participated) in Deicide, but was specifically condemned by Christ as having added impious "leaven" to the Law of God.

Perhaps one passage from St.Paul which does balance the matter and put it in proper perspective is the following...

28 As regards the gospel they are enemies of God, for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. (Romans 11:28)

In other words, as a people God has a purpose for the Jews - in the end times, they will as a people turn to God, and enter the Church. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š However, as far as their current condition is concerned, they are vagabonds and renegades, in so far as they have continued in the impiety of their forefathers. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Thus, they are no different than those who in olden times fell into idolatry and ceased to observe the teachings of the Law & Prophets - they may continue to exist as a people, with the possibility that the time will come that at least their children would turn from infidelity and "come home" so to speak...but in the mean time, they have fallen from grace. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Notice also that it is said quite explicitly, that the ultimate redemption of the Jewish people, our Lord's keeping them until that time, is due not to any personal merit on their part, but because of the righteousness of their forefathers - for the sake of them, the Lord will make good on His promises in spite of their infidelity.

Please keep in mind that the Lord also preserved Cain in this way - protecting him by placing a "mark" upon him, thus leaving him to roam as one despised (and rightfully so), but also protected by the Lord from being exterminated by the hands of those who would take it upon themselves to rid the world of him.

As for recognizing the role of Jewish people (who are very conscious of who they are, and who they are not, and who you are and who you are not), their culture, and their religion in mischief throughout history - this is no more an "excercise in hate" than recognizing such mischief in say, Islamic religion/civilization. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It takes little courage nowdays to speak poorly of Islam/Muslims (whether what one says is true or untrue - and there is a lot of both going around at the moment), but for some very obvious reasons (which no one is allowed to speak of apparently - "the Emperor has no clothes" type situation really) we westerners are not accorded the same "privilege" in polite society to subject Jews and Judaism to the same scrutiny.

Of course, I would ask that it be noticed that I say "no more an excercise in hate" - because of course, it can very much be a point for engendering hatred. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š But then again, you see alot of immoderate emotion and reactionary rhetoric coming from the opponents of Islam as well.

St. Gregory of Nyssa was also wrong in his origenist ideas, but he is still a Saint.

I know this is off-topic, but I must vindicate St Gregory of Nyssa on this one. There is this age-old and widespread misconception that any and all forms of apokatastasis are “origenist”; however the fact of the matter is that St Gregory of Nyssa along with Iraneous of Lyons taught forms of apokatastasis which are not counter-orthodox, nor can they appropriately be labeled “origenist”.

An Orthodox clarification of the context in which St Gregory of Nyssa undersrtood “the restoration of all things" can be found in Metropolitan Hierotheos' work titled “Life After Death” which may be found here at the following link:

Origen’s heresy (if he indeed ascribed to it) was the belief that the human will became the result of the status of one’s nature, arising from a scheme of repitive incarnations of pre-existent souls into created human bodies as a sort of course of driving the distorted nature to perfection, in order to ultimately achieve perfection in the human will, such that all are saved as a result. St Gregory of Nyssa’s conception however involved the restoration of the nature of human beings, however not their human will; and as such salvation is not imposed upon anyone contra to their free will.

Peace.

Logged

No longer an active member of this forum. Sincerest apologies to anyone who has taken offence to anything posted in youthful ignorance or negligence prior to my leaving this forum - October, 2012.

"Philosophy is the imitation by a man of what is better, according to what is possible" - St Severus

St Nikolaj is indeed a Saint, but you have turned him into an idol, as you have your "patriotism".

How you like to twist things! ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š My admiration and reverence for him means I have turned him into an idol does it? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Well if you are trying to imply that I worship him ahead of everything else, remember this: Virtually every paragraph in this book he beseeches Serbs to kneel before Christ and serve him. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š If there is one overall message in the book, it is: ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Return to Christ. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š No word appears more often than the word Christ. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š To say I have turned him into an idol, simply because I quote him and agree with him is ludicrous. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Should I assume that the media is your idol, since you espouse and adhere to their viewpoint? ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Using your logic it would be justifiable to claim this. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š My patriotism does not enter the equation. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I have not even mentioned it or used it in anyway in this discussion. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š I think you have problems with my screen name and a negative view of patriotism in general, and have therefore sought to include it in this discussion, citing it as an idol of mine. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š This niether surprises nor bothers me. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š It reminds me of my first posting in this forum, in which a neurotic poster declared that patriots 'scare him', simply because of my screen name.

I knew you would question "my interpretation" of the Scriptures, but in fact it is the interpretation given in the footnotes of the Orthodox Study Bible pp365-366.

St. Nikolaj was wrong on this point- it doesn't make him any less a Saint. St. Gregory of Nyssa was also wrong in his origenist ideas, but he is still a Saint.

Look who has declared him to be wrong!! You, an anonymous person on the internet. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š While I keep citing this Saint, you keep citing your interpretation. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Never will your interpretation be more valuable to me.

This is now my second and last admonishment. For the last time I beg you to turn away from this error.

If it was an error I would turn away as soon as possible. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š But all evidence points to you being the one who is wrong. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š As it happens I am going on a very long, 8 week trip and will be unable to access the internet. ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š Therefore God bless you all, and I hope that when I return we can continue to discuss this and other issues.

"I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan" (Apocalypse 2:9)

"Behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie--behold, I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and learn that I have loved you." (Apocalypse 3:9)

14 For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea; for you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews,15 who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all men16 by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved--so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them at last! (1 Thessalonians 2:14-16)

And all the people answered, "His blood be on us and on our children!" ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š (St.Matthew 27:25)

Augustine,

[Admonishment #1]And here my friend is the answer to why this is an error. The word translated as "Jews" in each citation above is "Ioudei" in the original koine, ie. "Judeans" and not "Ibrei" (Jews). This is most evident in the quote from Thessalonians you give above:"For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus which are in Judea; for you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Judeans, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets...""Jews" is "Ibrei" in koine, not "Ioudei". And when referring to the Jews in Romans 11, St. Paul never refers to them as "Ioudei" (Judeans) but "Israil" (Israel), because he is talking about the Jews, not the Judeans.

Similarly, the word used in the Greek Orthodox services on Great and Holy Saturday which some see as "antisemetic" is actually not "Jews", but "Judeans" ("O bloodthirsty Judeans! murderers of God!......")

And before anyone asks "what's the difference", this difference is best demonstrated by the fact that Christ and His disciples were Jews, but they were not Judeans. When Christ argues with the "Jews" in the King James version, He is actually a Jew arguing with Judeans.

Think of it this way: When I say "Washington is responsible for invading Iraq" I do not mean "the Americans are responsible for invading Iraq", In fact, I don't even mean that "every resident of Washington is responsible for invading Iraq", Similarly the fact that "the Judeans crucified Christ" does not mean "The Jews crucified Christ".

[/Admonishment #1]

All this is verifiable by your own examination of the facts. Have I said anything "emotive" in all this?

« Last Edit: July 04, 2005, 10:09:39 AM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

I should have interpreted that as meaning other people here, but not me, even though I'm taking the same position as everyone else?

I know your beliefs about Jews (conspiracy theory type of stuff--I've read your thoughts on the entire concept of conspiracy theories for that matter), and I do not agree. Neither do I agree with the way the Fathers are used to support the notion that the Jews as a people are in cahoots with Satan. I know you strongly disagree with my own position. I guess I don't know for sure what you meant by the statement, so I do take back my comment. I still don't think it would be impossible to have a fruitful conversation just because it is here though.

Even though Christ was born in Bethlehem, Christ and His disciples were Galileans. Christ grew up in Nazareth in Galilee, and Scripture says: "He shall be called a Nazarene". All His disciples hailed from Galilee.

After preaching through Galilee and travelling South and passing through Samaria, Christ and His Disciples enter Judea where the Judeans (Gk: "Ioudei") live. On Palm Sunday, Christ entered Jerusalem, the Capital of Judea and is at first welcomed by the Judeans (Ioudei), but then the Judeans (Ioudei) reject Him. On Great and Holy Friday, the Judeans (Ioudei) condemn Him to death. And when He is killed the Judeans (Ioudei) place a seal on His tomb.......

Do you see?

This isn't "Liberalism" or "PCness". This is FACTS. The Jews (Gk: "Ibrei") did not kill Christ, the Judeans (Ioudei) did.It is not "liberalism" or "PCness" to want the Scriptures and our Liturgical texts translated correctly to mean what they were intended to mean.

« Last Edit: July 04, 2005, 11:06:49 AM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

The word translated as "Jews" in each citation above is "Ioudei" in the original koine, ie. "Judeans" and not "Ibrei" (Jews). [....] And before anyone asks "what's the difference", this difference is best demonstrated by the fact that Christ and His disciples were Jews, but they were not Judeans. When Christ argues with the "Jews" in the King James [V]ersion, He is actually a Jew arguing with Judeans.

My goodness, this is unbelievable.

Bible History 101: The Kingdom of Israel was united under David and Solomon, but became divided in 920 BC due to Rehoboam's unjust rule. The northern kingdom, which is usually styled Israel and was composed of the 10 nothern tribes, proclaimed Jeroboam as king; they also set up a rival place of worship on Mount Gerizim. The southern tribes of Judah and Benjamin remained faithful to Rehoboam, and their kingdom, with its capital in Jerusalem, is usually styled Judah. Israel's capital, Samaria, fell to the Assyrians in 722 BC, and the local population assimilated into Assyrian culture through intermarriage, strictly forbidden by the Law. Therefore, the "Samaritans", as they came to be known, were considered unclean by those of the Kingdom of Judah. Meanwhile, the southern kigndom itself was attacked by the Babylonians, and eventually its subjects were brought to captivity, and Jerusalem was destroyed (605-586 BC). But in 536 BC some exiles return from Babylon and rebuild the city and the Temple, this last one being dedicated on 516 BC. Judah was eventually conquered by Alexander the Great (333 BC), it remained under Greek control until 166 BC, when the aged Mattathias started the successful Maccabean revolt against Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who defiled the Temple. Judea (Ioudaia is simply the Greek form of Judah) remained independent until 63 BC, when it became a vassal kingdom to the Romans, and then in AD 6 it was simply made a province of the Roman Empire.

Now, Hebrew is an ethnic term, and Israel national/religious: one might say that "the nation of the Hebrews is composed of the twelve tribes of Israel". "Israel" only became a specialized designation from 920 BC to 722 BC, while there was a kingdom called by that name. This kingdom, and its Hebrew peoples, simply disappeared after the Assyrian conquest because of intermarriage and assimilation. The result is the people called the Samaritans (already from the time of Ezra and Nehemiah). Therefore, anyone of Hebrew lineage in the post-exilic period was necessarily from the Kingdom of Judah (Ioudaia in Greek, and IudÃƒÆ’Ã†â€™Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â¦a in Latin), regardless of where they settled--and they did settle throughout the whole known world, as we can later see from the Book of Acts. A Judean (or Jew) was a descendant of the ancient Hebrew people of Israel which became reduced to the tribes that made up the southern Kingdom of Judah--whether they lived in Jerusalem, Nazareth, or Tarsus of Cilicia.

Thank you Augustine - very elegantlhy put. Thank you Julio - saved me a lot of typing. Bp Kallistos's translation of Holy Week uses Jews. This discussion is being to sound like a disciplinary problem in an inner city school. Teacher complains to Prinicipal about boy throwing a chair at him. Lib Principal answers: Did it hit you? (true story).. Oh for the days of "hairy legs and beer", of Joan Sunderland, Barry Tuckwell, Rolf Harris, Bill Kerr and Crocodile Dundee... We only have Steve left (she's a beauty).

"Apart from the question of anachronism, there is also the question of a faulty reading of the New Testament text. Who are the "Jews" that are referred to in the gospels? Jesus was a Jew by religion, as were most of his disciples. But the Greek word that is translated into English as "Jews" is actually "Ioudei", and could just as easily (and in many contexts more accurately) be translated as "Judaeans". Jesus and his disciples were Jews, but not Judaeans. They were not normally resident in Judaea, but in Galilee, which was under a different political authority, and they spoke with a different accent (Mt 26:73). When Jesus debated with the Judaean Pharisees ( Jn 8 ), they said he was a Samaritan (Jn 8:48). Samaritans were regarded as heretics. The woman of Samaria recognised Jesus as a Jew (Jn 4:9) and Jesus does not dispute this. Surely if John were antisemitic, and intending to promote antisemitism, he would have suppressed such evidence? The Samaritan woman also recognises the theological differences (Jn 4:20). By calling Jesus a "Samaritan", therefore, the Judaean Pharisees imply that he is a heretic, and perhaps his northern accent sounds to them as though it could just as easily be Samaritan as Galilean (Samaria was geographically between Judaea and Galilee, and Jesus had passed through it on his way to Judaea).

I believe that those who maintain that the Gospel according to St John is "antisemitic" have failed to distinguish between Jews and Judaeans, and that by assuming that "Ioudei" meant "Jews" in every case, they have read antisemitism into the text where none exists.

I do not dispute that some of these passages of scripture have later been used by Christians, including some Orthodox Christians, to justify antisemitism, but I believe that those who have done so were mistaken, and were misinterpreting the text. So I believe that using the text to justify antisemitism is twisting it, whether it is done by those promoting antisemitism, or by those promoting antiChristianity by claiming that Christianity is inherently antisemitic. "

Strange that someone who doesn't come from a backwater like Australia should say the same thing, eh observer?

By the way, some other errors in your last post:its "elegantly" not "eleganthly" "beginning" not "being""Sutherland" not "Sunderland"

Perhaps english is not your first language? And if it is, why should anyone listen to your opinion about a word in an ancient language when you can't even get your own language right?

« Last Edit: July 05, 2005, 08:26:43 PM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

"My brethren, let not many of you be teachers, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. For in many things we offend all. If any man stumbleth not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body. " (James 3:1-2)ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

So tell me Julio, was Christ a Judean (Gk: "Ioudei")? Even when the Gospels tell you that He is not? And even when the Judeans ("Ioudei")ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š themselves in the Gospel call Him a Samaritan (Gk "Samariti") in Jn 8:48 (which, by the way, He was not either)? So you insist that "Jesus of Nazareth" was a Judean when Nazareth is in Galilee?

Even in the face of indisputable evidence to the contrary, you guys insist on holding on to heresies which support unchristian antisemetism............

What's the point?

« Last Edit: July 05, 2005, 09:14:48 PM by ozgeorge »

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

"My brethren, let not many of you be teachers, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. For in many things we offend all. If any man stumbleth not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body. " (James 3:1-2)ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š

But you see, by the Apostle's standards I'm already on my way to greater condemnation, so I might as well make the most of it!

So tell me Julio, was Christ a Judean (Gk: "Ioudei")? Even when the Gospels tell you that He is not? And even when the Judeans ("Ioudei")ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š themselves in the Gospel call Him a Samaritan (Gk "Samariti") in Jn 8:48 (which, by the way, He was not either)? So you insist that "Jesus of Nazareth" was a Judean when Nazareth is in Galilee?

Yes, Christ was a Jew (Ioudaios), because as I explained earlier, of the 12 tribes of Israel, only the two tribes that made up the Kingdom of Judah remained, and spread all over the known world. Therefore, any Jew in the world then was either from the tribe of Judah (like Christ) or the tribe of Benjamin (like St Paul). That he was called a Samaritan and was told he had a demon in St John ch. 8 is simply a not-so-veiled malicious accusation by the Pharisees precisely to the effect that he was neither a Jew nor legitimate, but as you yourself pointed out, these accusations are false. And while Nazareth is in Galilee, Jesus family was Judean (=Jewish). After all, at the time of the census, Joseph had to bring Mary his wife to Bethlehem to be registered, because he was of the house and lineage of David--that is to say, from the tribe of Judah (cfr St Luke 2). So, quite plainly, the Holy Gospels do not say that the Lord was not a Ioudaios. What an idea!

Excellent!So when someone says that the progroms in Russia show slavs to be antisemetic, then they do not mean the Serbs are antisemetic- just as when the Gospel says that the Judaeans killed Christ, it does not mean the Jews in Galilee or Samaria did.

Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Now, Serbs killed Jesus and some people said that Slavs killed Him. Are they wrong? No! In that case Slavs did kill Jesus. (Now if you scale it down onto the Territory and populace of Israel (Ioudea) and the fact that Hebrews are much more connected that Slavs, saying that Ioudei killed Christ and not Ibrei is just not the case. Just as all Ibrei were sons of Abraham and old Israel, so they are (all) guilty of death of Christ.